"Who would leave children that young alone?"

[SapphireSteel]

I have no idea why she is not on the other page as an ambassador - maybe she is a different ambassador maybe they are getting round to it maybe she wants to have a different role - tmor hands on

But to say in original post that the site has dropped her like a hot stone ( your words ) is just not true

She is posted on the FRONT Page and her bio as above states welcome to NEW AMBASSADOR

pretty clear to me

Seriously? After all that fanfare and publicity? Oops forgot to bung her on the list? :lol:

She was on that page. She has been removed, recently.

:cow:

 

[gord]

Seriously? After all that fanfare and publicity? Oops forgot to bung her on the list? :lol:

She was on that page. She has been removed, recently.

:cow:

Listen I dont know I dont sit on the commitee - i didnt bring this up

you said they have " dropped he like a hot stone " this is patently not the case as we have shown from quoting directly from their site - it even says welcome to our new ambassador ???? how much more do you want

 

[Donjeta]

So, suppose that the organization has removed her photo from the ambassadors page because they think she is harmful for their cause or will be arrested soon or something. Have you got a credible explanation why they didn't remove her from more visible places elsewhere on the site?

She has her own page "Kate's Mission". Why would a hot stone have one?

 

[SapphireSteel]

She was posting about her excitement on 10 September 2012.

That is only a couple of months ago.

Do you think that if all traces of her suddenly disappeared, being one of their famous faces and leading a previously much publicised campaign, it would cause a question or six?

When organisations decide they have made a mistake they will step away quietly in order to contain the publicity. I believe this organisation feels (rather belatedly) that it has made a mistake with Ms McCann...for whatever reason.

Expect Kate to announce she has too much on her plate/become ill/is tied up with the review/the twins, and announce casually somewhere that she has had to give it up.

:cow:

 

[gord]

She was posting about her excitement on 10 September 2012.

That is only a couple of months ago.

Do you think that if all traces of her suddenly disappeared, being one of their famous faces and leading a previously much publicised campaign, it would cause a question or six?

When organisations decide they have made a mistake they will step away quietly in order to contain the publicity. I believe this organisation feels (rather belatedly) that it has made a mistake with Ms McCann...for whatever reason.

Expect Kate to announce she has too much on her plate/become ill/is tied up with the review/the twins, and announce casually somewhere that she has had to give it up.

:cow:

But all traces of her on the site have not dissappeared !!!! She has her face on the front page and she has her own drop down and has a welcome as a new ambassador That is not teh actions of a site that wants to quetly step away !!!!

 

[Clutchbag]

hardly a big deal anyway

 

[Donjeta]

It is quite possible that she is too busy to devote a lot of her time to the charity and I don't know if I ever expected her to but IMO if the organization realized they made a mistake but didn't want to erase all traces of her in order to keep it quiet it would make much more sense to redo the site to remove her photo from the front page and take away the page titled "Kate's mission" and keep a tiny photo somewhere on a page listing several other ambassadors as well. Many people probably get through the site never clicking the ambassadors page but everybody sees the front page and the red links bar.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Time will tell.

Some of us think it extraordinary they chose her as an Ambassador for missing people in the first place, considering the only experience she has in the subject is misplacing her own child.

:cow:

 

[Donjeta]

Missing people charities have a lot of people involved whose only experience is having lost a family member or a relative so I don't consider that odd at all but I think someone who considers it responsible parenting to abandon small toddlers alone in an unlocked apartment is a weird choice.

However, her history was very well known before she was selected as an ambassador so it's presumably been considered. It's probably a publicity thing. Kate McCann can get their charity mentioned in more magazines than most other people could.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Yes it is irrelevant to Madeleine's case, yes it is true she is no longer listed as an Official Ambassador.

As for her ongoing/future status, time will tell.

:cow:

I wonder if she does speeches on how to make sure your kids don't go missing?

That it's quite important not to go out drinking with your mates and leaving your babies alone?

Wierd choice indeed. I find it odd she even accepted the role in the first place, really.

:dunno:

 

[Clutchbag]

Yes it is irrelevant to Madeleine's case, yes it is true she is no longer listed as an Official Ambassador.

As for her ongoing/future status, time will tell.

:cow:

I wonder if she does speeches on how to make sure your kids don't go missing?

That it's quite important not to go out drinking with your mates and leaving your babies alone?

Wierd choice indeed. I find it odd she even accepted the role in the first place, really.

:dunno:

perhaps she couldnt say no, who knows.

Her sister in law is a member I think who is along with KM campaigning for families of missing people to get more help from the govt including financial help, I remember her writing in the papers how money had always been tight for them trying to bring up a family and searching for their child, and I was thinking huh? With millions in the fund including the fund proviso that it was to assist madeleines family financially on top of the search costs, how could money ever be tight it may be true for other families but in this case was a bit of an oxymoron, I will tryand find the article and link

here

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...anns-aunt-explains-why-she-has-joined-1079005

 

[SapphireSteel]

perhaps she couldnt say no, who knows.

Her sister in law is a member I think who is along with KM campaigning for families of missing people to get more help from the govt including financial help, I remember her writing in the papers how money had always been tight for them trying to bring up a family and searching for their child, and I was thinking huh? With millions in the fund including the fund proviso that it was to assist madeleines family financially on top of the search costs, how could money ever be tight it may be true for other families but in this case was a bit of an oxymoron, I will tryand find the article and link

here

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...anns-aunt-explains-why-she-has-joined-1079005

Thanks for that link. This caught my eye -


By Annie Brown

Madeleine McCann's aunt explains why she has joined charity for missing people.. and how search for little girl goes on
23 Dec 2010 00:00


IN the window of Patricia Cameron's porch is a photo of her niece Madeleine McCann with the caption, "Still missing, still missed, still looking."

The organisation are asking the Government to give families of missing people the same rights as victims of crime, access to legal and financial assistance and emotional support.

It hurts Patricia deeply to watch her little brother Gerry and his wife Kate grow emotionally and physically weaker because of the loss and endless searching for Madeleine.

Madeleine was snatched from the Portuguese holiday resort of Praia da Luz in the Algarve on May 3, 2007, as Gerry and Kate dined nearby.

For the McCanns, there was a desperate need for funds to pay for legal advice and a worldwide search.

"Money is constantly tight but they have to keep going. They will never give up looking and that costs money. Families of the missing still need to pay bills while they search but there is no right to any financial help."

After Madeleine disappeared, Patricia took on the role of babysitter for Kate and Gerry's twins, Sean and Amelie, now five, while their parents searched.

Hands up who knows exactly what happened to Madeleine?

Noone. Yet this paper is stating as fact that she was "snatched" when it has never been proven.

Leaving that aside, the constant referrals to the wish for more money when we know they'd already had plenty. Millions, in fact, so why are they asking for more? Patricia mentions money more than she mentions Madeleine.

:banghead:

The references to the "searching" that the parents were doing are wildly inaccurate too. We know they have never physically joined any search for their daughter! Kate has admitted it!

We also know all other physical searches have been suspended too, so even the "will never stop searching" part is wrong.

And what sort of legal advice would two innocent parents need?

:cow:

 

[Clutchbag]

this is what caught my eye

Money is constantly tight but they have to keep going. They will never give up looking and that costs money. Families of the missing still need to pay bills while they search but there is no right to any financial help."
:banghead:
:floorlaugh:

this says they were paying for searching themselves, what a brazen faced lie unless the sister in law is having a laugh

As for legal advice only thing i can think of is when a family member has abducted your child, well, apart from legal advice if you think you maybe charged with something!

 

[CherryPie]

There are laws for child neglect in the Uk and Portugal and leaving a sleeping child fifty metres away for half an hour at a time is not considered neglect.

I will have to disagree with that. According to the NSPCC there is no legally set age at which it is acceptable to leave your child alone. The law states that it is unlawful to leave a child at home alone when doing so puts them at risk. Which regardless of what happened and who was responsible, the McCanns leaving them alone did put all 3 of them at risk.

If this had happened in the UK, AND they lived on a council estate, they would have been prosecuted.

http://www.nspcc.org.uk/help-and-ad...ng-advice/home-alone/home-alone_wda90761.html

 

[Tink]

Speaking of "who would leave a child alone" - I was reading the statements of Jeremy, Gerry's friend from tennis who stopped to talk to him that night. I noticed that Jeremy and his wife left their two children in the creche when they went to the Tapas restaurant, and that one of the creche staff came and notified them when their child woke up and cried for them. That's what I call reasonable, caring parents.

And then the next night, when Jeremy's little boy wasn't sleeping, he took him out for a walk in the pram to help him get to sleep. Yes, another example of Jeremy as a caring father. Was out walking him when he ran into Gerry, who makes what sounds to me like a bit of snarky remark: "Oh, you're on walking duty." Jeremy says that he and his wife are staying in their flat that evening. Gerry says that if he's on a two-week holiday, he'd only stay in maybe one night.

I wish perhaps Gerry had learned something from Jeremy's example.

And Jeremy did not see Jane Tanner or a man carrying a child.

Tink

 

[SapphireSteel]

Speaking of "who would leave a child alone" - I was reading the statements of Jeremy, Gerry's friend from tennis who stopped to talk to him that night. I noticed that Jeremy and his wife left their two children in the creche when they went to the Tapas restaurant, and that one of the creche staff came and notified them when their child woke up and cried for them. That's what I call reasonable, caring parents.

And then the next night, when Jeremy's little boy wasn't sleeping, he took him out for a walk in the pram to help him get to sleep. Yes, another example of Jeremy as a caring father. Was out walking him when he ran into Gerry, who makes what sounds to me like a bit of snarky remark: "Oh, you're on walking duty." Jeremy says that he and his wife are staying in their flat that evening. Gerry says that if he's on a two-week holiday, he'd only stay in maybe one night.

I wish perhaps Gerry had learned something from Jeremy's example.

And Jeremy did not see Jane Tanner or a man carrying a child.

Tink

The Jeremy/Gerry chat is interesting for another reason too.

Gerry went to the apartment, performed his "check", went to the toilet, and says that he believes the "abductor" was actually in the apartment at the time.

Gerry then goes downstairs, and bumps into Jez.

They stand at the bottom of the stairs while they talk.

The stairs they allege Madeleine was carried down.

How on earth could they have missed Madeleine being carried down the stairs only metres away from where they were standing?

The answer is, of course, they couldn't miss it, if it had actually happened.

They think everyone is so stupid.

:banghead:

 

[Tink]

I thought their suggestion was that Madeleine was taken out the front door?

Or wasn't there a suggestion that she must have been either passed out the window or that the person climbed out of the window with her? Because otherwise why was the window open?

(And wouldn't someone notice a person climbing in and out of a window with a child?)

I was just struck by the difference between Jeremy (who behaved the way I would expect a parent to behave: arranging care for his young children if he wanted to eat out, responding quickly when the child woke and cried, taking his child out in the pram to help him get to sleep) and Gerry (who felt it was just fine to leave his kids alone all evening, who was unconcerned about the children waking and crying for long periods of time, and who made rather mocking comments about a father who sought to soothe a restless baby, insisting that he (Gerry) would be out every evening on holidays (apparently no matter what that might mean to his children who were left alone)).

Tink

 

[SapphireSteel]

I thought their suggestion was that Madeleine was taken out the front door?

Or wasn't there a suggestion that she must have been either passed out the window or that the person climbed out of the window with her? Because otherwise why was the window open?

(And wouldn't someone notice a person climbing in and out of a window with a child?)

I was just struck by the difference between Jeremy (who behaved the way I would expect a parent to behave: arranging care for his young children if he wanted to eat out, responding quickly when the child woke and cried, taking his child out in the pram to help him get to sleep) and Gerry (who felt it was just fine to leave his kids alone all evening, who was unconcerned about the children waking and crying for long periods of time, and who made rather mocking comments about a father who sought to soothe a restless baby, insisting that he (Gerry) would be out every evening on holidays (apparently no matter what that might mean to his children who were left alone)).

Tink

It changed.

On 4 May Gerry's sworn statement said he entered the FRONT door, using a key.

By the time of their "Madeleine was here" video it had changed to them using the BACK door (patio door) to avoid waking the kids with the noise.

The back/patio door was unlocked and David Payne used it for his check.

So why would the McCanns alone "go the long way", all the way around to the FRONT, to use their key when the back (nearest) door was already open?

(the front being the street side, not the Tapas Restaurant side).

Makes no sense at all either way.

 

[SapphireSteel]

A mother in the US left her children in the care of a 13yo baby sitter in the middle of the day so she could go to church, and she was arrested and charged with child endangerment as a result.

http://newcanaan.patch.com/articles/chimney-scam

A church going mother gets arrested even though she had a babysitter. Two doctors go scott free, even though they didn't bother to get any sort of babysitter at all.

How did this happen?

Why weren't the McCanns charged with neglect or endangerment?

We KNOW Madeleine was endangered, she disappeared, and they left the twins in danger too.

 

[blefuscu]

I'm British and a parent and I've never left my children asleep in an apartment while I've gone out. I've never done it at home and I wouldn't do it abroad. I'd never heard of people doing it before the McCann case and I know it was met with horror by myself, my friends and many others. I do hope that people who live in countries away from the UK don't think is a normal practice for parents.